Re: Motivation for the Oil Barons

Fred Weiss wrote:
> On Jun 5, 2:54 pm, DB <a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Fred Weiss wrote:
>>> On Jun 5, 12:11 pm, DB <a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> Now, the truth is that 'they' don't want to build new refineries.
>>> Hyperion obviously does...
>> And has nothing to do with your comment:
>> "But this is precisely why we have not had a new oil refinery built in
>> the country in 32 years."
>>
>> A bald face lie. Bother to research your claims before you make them.
> 
> Maybe you should.
> 
> "No new refineries have been built in the US in the past 25 years. And
> petroleum industry experts say anyone would have to be crazy to launch
> such an effort -- even though present refineries are running at nearly
> 100 % of capacity and local gasoline shortages are beginning to crop
> up." Datamonitor
> 
> http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntn12966.htm

Foofoo, no cites. I've already posted numbers. Capacity has been 85-90% 
and stocks are growing. They are producing more fuels then are being 
demanded. Here are the numbers:
And:
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/crude-futures-end-one-month-low/story.aspx?guid=%7BB91F6089-4E43-4B3D-8291-9E6657EF94AB%7D&dist=msr_4

quote:
Refinery buzz
But refinery utilization was up 1.8% at 89.7% of capacity compared with 
87.9 % a week earlier, the Energy Department re****ted. The increase 
prompted a rise in petroleum products.
Refinery operating capacity is at its highest level since the beginning 
of the year, according to Chris Lafakis, an associate economist at 
Moody's Economy.com.
Motor gasoline supplies rose 2.9 million barrels to 209.1 million 
barrels, according to the Energy Department. They were up 2.2 million 
barrels at 210.4 million, the API said.
Distillate stocks were up 2.3 million barrels at 111.7 million barrels, 
the government figures showed. They climbed by 4.5 million barrels, the 
API said.


> "The last refinery to be completed in the United States was in 1976,
> and Mr. McGinnis knows all too well that community and political
> opposition squashed earlier projects. His proposed refinery in Arizona
> has already been forced away from its original site near Phoenix, in
> 2003, after the state considered expanding the city's clean-air
> limits." - CorpWatch
> 
> http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12227

They got their permit. The only permit *applied* for in over 30 years. 
Their real problem is making a deal with Mexico for oil. Ooops, Mexico 
won't be an ex****ter very much longer. You've heard about Cantarell?
<http://seekingalpha.com/article/25557-mexican-cantarell-oil-field-in-decline-prelude-to-a-larger-crash>

Damn, what good is a refinery without oil?

> "...government policies have contributed to higher prices by reducing
> domestic refining capacity, which has limited the supply of gasoline.
> No new oil refineries have been built in the United States for almost
> 30 years, and many refineries have closed.  Building new oil
> refineries or expanding existing ones is among the most affordable,
> effective and reliable ways to increase supplies of gasoline and
> diesel fuels and to lower prices.
> 
> Unfortunately, environmental regulations, requirements for so-called
> boutique fuels and mandates for ethanol have raised the cost of
> building new refineries.  Increasingly, it is cheaper to im****t
> refined petroleum products instead of producing fuel here.  The energy
> bills currently being considered by Congress are likely to discourage
> new refinery construction rather than encourage it.  These policies
> will not lower prices at the pump or increase energy security." - NCPA
> 
> http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba603/

Also:
"Petroleum refiners have responded to existing and proposed expanded 
ethanol mandates by canceling 40 percent of planned expansions in 
capacity, reducing potential new output from 1.6 million b/d to less 
than one million b/d."

Perhaps you are not getting this. The industry has the capacity they 
want. If they don't apply for expansions and act on them, this is what 
you get. Counting refineries is stupid on its face. With half the 
refineries that existed 20 some years ago, capacity is down 8% and that 
was the road the industry took. If Exxon acquires a business with 
several refineries and decides to to shut some down while expanding 
others, refinery count will drop. If Exxon decides to expand a refinery 
outside of the U.S. and close an old one in the U.S. refinery count will 
go down. But all you see is the Environmental boggy man, a need to blame 
someone for a problem that does not even exist but that the industry 
wants capacity to run at 85-90%. Now if you don't like the industry 
running at 85-90%, take the argument up with the industry.

<http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/electricity/Oil_and_Gas/articles.cfm?ID=11829>

> I didn't even have to work hard to find these citations on Google and
> I barely went half way down the first page.

You can find any truth you want on the internet. But foofoo without 
cites and cites and underlying numbers is just foofoo.

Keep pretending.......